CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

Different responses to pedestrian injury

(4 posts)
  • Started 13 years ago by Wilmington's Cow
  • Latest reply from custard

No tags yet.


  1. I was just thinking after reading the comments on the cycle shelter story in the Hootsmon, which had thread drift that this place would be proud of, that the differing views of what to do after someone is injured by a bike or car are indicative of their relative perceived importance as well.

    One person hit by a bike years ago on Porty Prom and 'No Cycling' signs go up. I've yet to hear of a single road that was closed completely to cars simply because a pedestrian was struck by a car (I guess it wouldn't leave many places to drive).

    Also, when there's an incident involving a bike then, naturally, the public response is that cyclists should be stopped, or controlled, or run over, or taxed. In many many incidents involving cars the immediate response is "Well that's a dangerous piece of road."

    I propose that all road users are on equal footing!

    Posted 13 years ago #
  2. wingpig
    Member

    Wasn't Blackett temporarily completely shut a few years ago when a pedestrian was knocked down and killed?

    Posted 13 years ago #
  3. Min
    Member

    I read a story about a prom somewhere else that was having the same issue of whether cyclists should be allowed to use it or not. The "against" argument was that "cyclists and pedestrians do not mix" which you hear quite a lot. In principle I agree with this but there is never any suggestion that "cars and cycles do not mix" despite the hundreds of cyclists killed every year and the thousands more injured!

    Cyclists should be on the roads where they can get killed and not on the prom where the chances of anyone being killed is vanishingly tiny!

    Posted 13 years ago #
  4. custard
    Member

    speed bumps are the usual response

    Posted 13 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin